The Universe's Origin--Finite or Infinite Universe, God or no God, etc--Hypotheses

[Theseus]

This thread is intended for a rationale discussion about the origin(s) of the universe that may include, but not be limited to, physics hypotheses on the universe's creation, why it seems logical to you that God exists or doesn't exist, etc.

Let's do this according to the philosopher Hegel's logic on "cause and effect".

He pointed out-in philosophy as well as scientific thought-that what our limited human knowledge presumes is often inaccurate and/or incomplete.

It is possible that what we perceive as
A---> B is really, in fact
A--->n1--->n2--->n3--->n times---> B
that is, there might be an indeterminable number of steps that are beyond our understanding/instrumentality/...

so....cause and effect might be a relatively simplistic explanation for what is really a much more complex relationship

I am going to extract some posts from the other thread where this discussion began to keep the information intact.

 

[Theseus]

It would make life so much easier if people who followed religions weren't so imposeful as if it was a universal law and realized the true meaning that it's just a philosophy of life. Nobody dies for mocking a so called omni-potent being, because if they did it would be on-spot. Not coincidencially days, weeks, months, years AFTER. I guarantee you that 80% of Americans have taken lords name in vain at one or more points in their life. Give or take, it is a large number regardless.

Now another fact- At least 1 or more person(s) dies every minute in America. This logic states that coincidencially they could of said "god -expletive- it" just a day before or whats so ever of a time frame. Then where the shit gets smeared is where people come in and try to connect the dots to things that just simply ARE NOT THERE! It's a freakin coincidence. There is no proof aside a silly silly storybook based on good morals that carries ultimatums.

How about you go to a mirror and chant bloody mary however many times it was. Does this mean she will come and kill you? The same logic can be applied to the bible. It's just a story, although it is history -- there are many instances of history where untold strength or mythical attributes are shown by people. Of course the survivors of the history's period or the victors like to exaggerate alot.

The moment this argument started, it was already over. For some strange reason people insist on trying to prove it truthful.

There is no way to prove whether God exists or not just like there's no way to prove you will incur his wrath upon taking his name in vain.

I never have problems with people believing in him and that he exists, but I do have problems when people attempt to try to get me to believe the same thing or to try to "prove" to me he exists. I live in a world of logic, science and hard facts. When you introduce that into my world, it crumbles and becomes reduced to a pile of contradictions, hypocrisy and fanaticism.

Basically people who follow a certian religion (call it what hell you want.) Need to learn spritiual self-control to keep it to themselves and only discuss it with people who care to listen and are of similar belief. And then there's us. Those of us who live in a world of logic-- should leave them alone and stop trying to prove that their "God" doesn't exist and whatanot, but feel free when they try to force it on you... /end mini-rant

.

 

[Theseus]

Very logical and compelling posting...

It's late for me so I'll have to be quick. (edit: or not!)

I agree on many things you've posted. I'm a science-oriented person. I am for analytical logic and empirical data, and verifying the existence of things before coming to conclusions... but logically (for me at least), I drew a different conclusion than you may have.

I concluded that not everything in the universe will ever be proved and solved using logic such as questions regarding mortality and why things exist. Even at the sub-atomic level, where quarks and electrons exist, we cannot help but wonder why they are there in the first place.

To me, logically, my existence is as impossible as the existence of God who "can reason." If we can reason, why can't God? Another logical approach to understanding God, taken by many scientists including Einstein, is the Spinoza's God who reveals himself in the harmony of all that exists, not a God who concerns himself with the fate and actions of human beings. This Spinoza's God is synonymous to a cosmic religious feeling.

But my logic tells me that there is much more than a Spinoza's God because of our capability to reason. If we were to look at our origins from either a religious or evolutionary standpoint, did we as humans come from nothing (a spark of life)? Or did we as humans come from monkeys from sea life from one-celled structures from what...nothing (or cosmic dust)? Something sounds out of place here to me about the evolutionary origin creating our capability for reason, even without God. It's amazing we're not mindless beings. why should we even be able to think for ourselves?

Are those questions answerable purely with logic and hard evidence alone? No. Is this contradiction, hypocrisy, or fanatism? No, but I know what you mean.

I also happen to agree that not everything in the Bible should be taken literally.

But then again, I agreed with pretty much everything else you said. You stated everything in such a constructive and proactive way.

.

 

[Theseus]

Are those questions answerable purely with logic and hard evidence alone? No. Is this contradiction, hypocrisy, or fanatism? No, but I know what you mean.

I personally though I took my posting a little overboard, it was late for me as well. While I do believe that most things can be explained with logic and science I do try to keep an open mind for the latter to exist. Hierarchy of facts is a funny thing don't you agree? As per in the bolded statement -- I agree with ya there.

Back when people believed the world was flat and the sun revolved around the world it was a "fact" but this suddenly changed as time progressed.

It's weird to have a God pre-exist and create a whole universe from -nothing- because if something can be created from nothing (oppositive of anti-matter) by an 'omni-potent' being then this would state that God could of been created as well by another ifinite being prior. The concept of creating something in void contradicts the very idea of omni-potentce by our current understandings. I don't think we will ever find out the true origins of man -- one reason is we're so destructive of ourselves, by the time we figure out solutions (answers to HIV, cancer, meaning of life.) we probably will be in a nuclear winter and have completely depleated all viable sources of food, fuel and such.

It wouldn't be going out on a limb to call us an evolved virus. Frankly I could draw up some elaborate story of how an alien visted earth, took a shit, the batrica reacted to the oxygen environment and spawned tons of various flora of cells, as they spread out they adapted via darwinism over time and became dinosaurs and the lot. It makes my brain hurt thinking about this. I do admit it would be nice to take hope that some higher being was watching over us, but I refuse to give in without proof.

I have a funny question- Who's to say the devil didn't write the bible? That would be such a tragic irony.

.

 

[Theseus]

Even at the sub-atomic level, where quarks and electrons exist, we cannot help but wonder why they are there in the first place.

To me, logically, my existence is as impossible as the existence of God who "can reason." If we can reason, why can't God?

Just think, if you admit the overwhelming complexity of this universe, how can you possibly LOGICALLY conclude that a divine entity with incredible intelligence would come into existence out of nothing and create the universe? It makes absolutely no sense, scientifically and logically.

We are created because of evolution. We were created because of our parents. Our parents were created by their parents and it goes on and on... all the way to a single celled organisms. What about non-living to living? We don't know but something happened. It's a slow process.

Surely, I marveled at our existence, not just me but also you. Why do things exist in the first place? We don't know and it's probably meaningless - it's just a concept that we are neurotically obsessed with. For us to say, "There must be God" is akin to saying "There must be Zeus." It isn't there. It isn't scientific. It's a philosophical concept.

When primitive men could not figure out why we have rainbows or thunders, they created gods to explain for those events. We now laugh at their illogical and unscientific thinking but it was all they had at that time.

And now, we have people saying that "God" is behind everything which is really "I don't understand and I am comforted with the idea that there's a simple explanation for everything - God did it."

Intelligent Design is the modern myth with no scientific support at all.

.

 

[Theseus]

(Theseus's reply is shown in italics in this post)

.

I personally though I took my posting a little overboard, it was late for me as well. While I do believe that most things can be explained with logic and science I do try to keep an open mind for the latter to exist. Hierarchy of facts is a funny thing don't you agree? As per in the bolded statement -- I agree with ya there.

Well I go overboard sometimes too, no big deal there. I agree it's a funny thing that "facts" are subject to human opinion. Some people just don't know how to distinguish fact from opinion and propoganda.

Back when people believed the world was flat and the sun revolved around the world it was a "fact" but this suddenly changed as time progressed.

It's weird to have a God pre-exist and create a whole universe from -nothing- because if something can be created from nothing (oppositive of anti-matter) by an 'omni-potent' being then this would state that God could of been created as well by another ifinite being prior. The concept of creating something in void contradicts the very idea of omni-potentce by our current understandings. I don't think we will ever find out the true origins of man -- one reason is we're so destructive of ourselves, by the time we figure out solutions (answers to HIV, cancer, meaning of life.) we probably will be in a nuclear winter and have completely depleated all viable sources of food, fuel and such.

I think you make some great points, but the concept of more than one "omni-potent/scient" entity makes sense to me only if a multiverse exists. In the same universe, however, God being created by another infinite being prior makes no sense to me. They'd probably have to be a "collective of one" otherwise that would mean we have many Gods, every one perfect. Their conclusions on everything would be the same, and why couldn't the first God have created the universe instead of the second God?

It wouldn't be going out on a limb to call us an evolved virus. Frankly I could draw up some elaborate story of how an alien visted earth, took a shit, the batrica reacted to the oxygen environment and spawned tons of various flora of cells, as they spread out they adapted via darwinism over time and became dinosaurs and the lot. It makes my brain hurt thinking about this. I do admit it would be nice to take hope that some higher being was watching over us, but I refuse to give in without proof.

Problem is, as long as the universe exists, you may never find scientific proof. If someone asked you for a sample of your soul, would you be able to give it to them?

I have a funny question- Who's to say the devil didn't write the bible? That would be such a tragic irony.

Oh well! That'd be a terrible irony. At least we have'd have something.

By the way, the post I made below is for both you and Netrox..

-----------------------------------------------

.

Just think, if you admit the overwhelming complexity of this universe, how can you possibly LOGICALLY conclude that a divine entity with incredible intelligence would come into existence out of nothing and create the universe? It makes absolutely no sense, scientifically and logically.

That conclusion you've presented is highly illogical and makes no sense to me, because it's not the same as my conclusion. The assumptions, by themselves, twist the logic.

1. I never stated that a divine entity was created, or came into existence.
2. My logic at first seems illogical due to calculating a high probability for what otherwise seems illogical.
3. It becomes simple logic, but incredibly complex to explain.

I am going to list several hypotheses and a sequence of thoughts to accompany them, including the "evolved virus" example Dark-Half provided.

Human beings exist on this planet, hypothetically, because

1. Extraterrestial beings came and took a dump on the planet, their shit (viruses/bacteria) reacts with the oxygen environment, creating a plethora of living organisms.
2. The Big Bang occurs and billions of years take place while Earth forms, turning itself into a hospitable planet for evolving organisms. This is done without a higher power that has a conscience, it is merely a cosmic occurence.
3. A higher power with a conscience is present, and has the power to create the universe and all within.
4. A number of higher powers are involved, such as in Greek mythology. Scientific data has shown that many once unexplainable phenomena, such as eclipses, are not a result of these 'gods'. Still, that doesn't 100% dismiss the notion, however far-fetched, that many gods could be involved in our creation such as an entire alien race.
5. We existed before essence, as in existentialism, and we are really illusions of our existence's imagination.
6. Physics - String Theory - several versions of ourselves living alternate realities in parallel universes, with universes of matter and anti-matter overlapping.
7. A combination of any of those factors. ie. A higher power with or without a conscience creates aliens (either like or unlike us) on another planet, the aliens travel to Earth and intentionally or unintentionally creates human beings, either that or human beings are already present, and the aliens teach the humans their sophisticated ways and leave behind unexplainable phenomenon. Chariot of the Gods way of thinking. Was God an astronaut?

This is the sequence involved in my thinking as I reflect upon those factors:

1. If the universe had a beginning, was there something prior to the beginning? It would have to be something beyond human comprehension that defies logic, science, and imagination. Something that's probably always been there; no beginning and no end. This makes no scientific sense. The scientific, evolutionary belief that the universe had a beginning is self-contradictionary because in order to have a beginning, something had to have triggered it, so something must've already been there to trigger it, otherwise nothing would remain nothing. How would you dispute this?
2. An infinite number of universes exists, but the same phenomenon remains: what triggered it and put matter and anti-matter into existence? It cannot be nothing, because the laws of physics had to have been created by something.
3. The existence of another race of aliens, whether occupied with individual or collective entities, still fails to answer if they're finite beings, created somehow, or infinite without beginning or end, which makes as much sense as being created from nothing although "infinite" and "created from nothing" aren't synonymous because it's like an oxymoron: "an infinite being without beginning that was created"?? Not everything could have been created. There had to be a source.
4. If God exists, whether a mere cosmic force (Spinoza's God) or one that has a conscience, then he's all that I can come up with to trigger the phenomenon of how the universe began based on the above.
5. Our capability to think is created by neuron synapses in the brain. Our ability to "think" seems as logical as the presence of a God who can reason, because our ability to think is illogical in itself. If we are capable of it, why can't whatever has created us, whether it's the laws of physics or God himself? Therefore, logic in this instance tells me that God can think like we do. Can you tell me why it's not a logical conclusion?
6. Since God's existence will probably never get scientifically backed up, and I have arrived at the conclusion of the existence of a "God of reason" according to my logic, I have no choice but to choose to believe in His existence.
7. Ask yourself, do you believe that you have a soul? If so, prove you have a soul by backing it up with scientific evidence, by getting a sample of it. In the same way, try to prove God's existence if he's an unembodied spirit.
8. Do you care about your soul? Do you know the answer to what may happen to you after death? Is science capable of obtaining hard data from people in the afterlife?
9. Questions like those were intended to be answered by religion, not science.
10. Does this sequence of logic seem rational or irrational to you?


We are created because of evolution. We were created because of our parents. Our parents were created by their parents and it goes on and on... all the way to a single celled organisms. What about non-living to living? We don't know but something happened. It's a slow process.

Maybe the single sperm or egg cell (one, not both) is already alive and contains the life force / individualism, although we won't know until they're bigger. We'll probably never know.

Surely, I marveled at our existence, not just me but also you. Why do things exist in the first place? We don't know and it's probably meaningless - it's just a concept that we are neurotically obsessed with. For us to say, "There must be God" is akin to saying "There must be Zeus." It isn't there. It isn't scientific. It's a philosophical concept.

When primitive men could not figure out why we have rainbows or thunders, they created gods to explain for those events. We now laugh at their illogical and unscientific thinking but it was all they had at that time.

And now, we have people saying that "God" is behind everything which is really "I don't understand and I am comforted with the idea that there's a simple explanation for everything - God did it."

Yeah, many of them haven't thought it thoroughly in detail. I'd say it's foolish if we did not question our own beliefs once in a while.

Intelligent Design is the modern myth with no scientific support at all.

It may be a myth with no scientific backup, but there is logic to it.

 

[Theseus]

I think you make some great points, but the concept of more than one "omni-potent/scient" entity makes sense to me only if a multiverse exists. In the same universe, however, God being created by another infinite being prior makes no sense to me. They'd probably have to be a "collective of one" otherwise that would mean we have many Gods, every one perfect. Their conclusions on everything would be the same, and why couldn't the first God have created the universe instead of the second God?

Here's a problem. Despite us being intelligent it could be possible but only beyond our level of comprehension. It's just a theory of my abstract imagination. Trying to think up theories and possiblities and rationalize 0 suddenly becomes 1 when nothing existed prior, in my mind contradicts the possiblity that omni-potence exists. Because if there was a "begining" for the world, there was also a "begining" for the omni-potent. I need a break from this haa... I'm starting to confuse myself.

.

 

[Theseus]

A better way to explain it;

A fire can suddenly not materalize. There had to be a match or fire prior to cause a fire. Before the match there had to be a tree and chemical compounds, before the tree there had to be a tree. Before the chemical compounds there had to be animals dying to be returned to earth in forms of such.

Keep on backtracking you'll always need something that it came from prior so if an omni-potent exists, then he would of had to have came from something. NOWHERE in nature does something spawn simply from nothing. Nowhere. Not even in the womb.

I'm starting to wonder what if there's no such thing as a point origin. What if there was no begining and it's just a way of human thinking. An imagination. It's a stupid thing to think as well, frankly like you said... we'll probably never know. Oh well.

.

 

[Theseus]

A better way to explain it;

A fire can suddenly not materalize. There had to be a match or fire prior to cause a fire. Before the match there had to be a tree and chemical compounds, before the tree there had to be a tree. Before the chemical compounds there had to be animals dying to be returned to earth in forms of such.

Keep on backtracking you'll always need something that it came from prior so if an omni-potent exists, then he would of had to have came from something. NOWHERE in nature does something spawn simply from nothing. Nowhere. Not even in the womb.

I'm starting to wonder what if there's no such thing as a point origin. What if there was no begining and it's just a way of human thinking. An imagination. It's a stupid thing to think as well, frankly like you said... we'll probably never know. Oh well.

Let me try somehow to explain. Like this, the reason I'm a christian and have strong faith of who God is. Its not bec He's somewhere out there. Who is God? How can we grasp the picture of who God is and how He does it? We as human try to find deeper, deeper and questioning deeper can cause a headache and make it feel like my brain explose. Hehehehe. God made everything even molucule, atoms and etc. How? He's a Creator we never know how He does it. We don't ask God and its good to analyze how it works, but getting to deep by ignoring who God is or even not believing God will get us nowhere. This is not just religion, whether believe or not, all of us still stand God. All of the nature is showing who God is. Thru years since creations, almost everyone believe there is God or gods. We are humans and frailty. Constant questions and whomever the person of different beliefs brought up leading many astray and lead many in different behaviors and views. I hope that is the best I can explain.

.

 

[Theseus]

It is true that one answer will spawn more questions. I suppose I feel silly believing in someone as our creator where-as he/she/it might not even exist. I never dismiss the possiblity that God might exist, however I refuse to accept it as a fact without viable proof.

I follow most christian morales with some flexibly because it is how I was raised, the part about believing an omni-potent being existing and dreaming up a universe in 7 days is far fetched.

.

 

[Theseus]

It is true that one answer will spawn more questions. I suppose I feel silly believing in someone as our creator where-as he/she/it might not even exist. I never dismiss the possiblity that God might exist, however I refuse to accept it as a fact without viable proof.

I follow most christian morales with some flexibly because it is how I was raised, the part about believing an omni-potent being existing and dreaming up a universe in 7 days is far fetched.

There is nothing wrong with questioning everything, even the existence of God. I question everything, searching for answers; but there are more mysteries than answers we can deduct. Beliefs don't have to be based on hard evidence to exist; that's why they're called "beliefs".

What you're describing in your other post are the cycles of nature, such as the ecological cycle. I can understand where you're getting with this, and frankly, I don't think you are crazy (maybe a little, just joking). But even in general relativity in physics, there had to be a singularity (point origin) "whenever there was a certain amount of mass in a region." Even the most advanced hypothesis in physics (to my knowledge) requires the existence of a singularity (big bang origin) but there is one especially interesting hypothesis called the Hartle-Hawking no-boundary proposal that somewhat explains somewhat the existence of an infinite universe, but with a finite one as well. The hypothesis here is that the finite universe has an extent, but the infinite one is without boundaries.

It is such a complex subject that it deserves its own thread. Which is why I'm planning on starting a new thread where we all can discuss the universe's origin, and analytical ideas corresponding to why we may live in a finite/infinite universe, with or without God.

Oh, and by the way, the "sequence of thoughts" I posted above are probabilities I have given a better than 50/50 chance of being true. To me, they are strong probabilities. Everyone may view each thought differently, in terms of probability of it happening. That's how we create what we believe in, by giving a thought a probability of being true or false. Even if the probability reaches 100% in some cases, in which the person is closed to further possibilities. When you are not dismissing entirely the notion that God exists, you probably have given it a 33% or 67% probability of being true.

It might make no sense to some people when I say that, but if you read it closely and carefully, you'll understand what I'm talking about. Although what we're discussing is a lot of speculation, it seems that one can analyze all this rationally.

Therefore I'm going to create a separate thread in the Christianity, Religion, Spiritual & Other Beliefs subcategory to discuss our hypotheses and ideas on what took place during the universe's beginning, in a logical manner. Some posts from here will be extracted to there, so we can keep the info together and others will understand better what got us into this.

.

 

[Theseus]

...and that's when I created this thread. Discussion resumes from here....

 

[Dark-Half]

There are alot of theories. Many of them in books and movies already, alot of them seem plausible.

For an instance; The One (Jet li) Matrix (Keanu Reeves) - These are movies with alternatives of reality. The former is about multiple dimensions where we are a collective of one person, different in each dimension, but literally the same. The latter is to offer a thought that maybe the reality we live in is a fallacy.

For books- The lathe of heaven (Ursula LeGuin, good book btw) The time Machine (H.G. Wells) These are concept storylines that would otherwise maniuplate 'reality' but are very interesting.

What do they have in common with discussing the point origin of a universe? Nothing much, although they do give insight on alternatives of how reality could exist -- in frank we could simply be a world dreamed up by one man/woman, we could be living proof of a story in a complete different dimension, one that existed because of his/her vast imagination.

To the best of our knowledge at this point we just have theories to go by. Many times I have thought up various different ways to attack this, I've also thought-

Does the universe expand outward or is it indeed confinded and finite to the point you 'exit' the said area of confinement and appear at exactly the oppositive ends of the galaxy? Who knows, feel free to offer your theories and we can have some constructive fun that will make your brain turn to ooze trying to make sense of it BWAHAHA...ahem... yeah.

 

[Star]

Hi I read your thread. Its make my brain explode. Sound like physics science and explain how does it work.
What about have you read Stephen Hawking?? A book called "A brief history of time." I have to reread again about this book, really it give me confuse and trying to figure out how does it work.He is theoretical predictions. It is fascinating subject of wormhole and time travel. I'm sure you have heard of him before.

 

[darkflare83]

well not all things have to be logical there is documented supernatural events through out the world even if its illogical it still exist nevertheless so so my theory is the universe is infinite because we havent even begin to discover an portion of the universe granted we know other solar systems yet there is so much more out there and how far does it reach? doi have evidence that infinite unverse does exist? no i do not but its just an theory as for the unvierse creation i as an chirisitan believes that god created it it might sound illogical but its still an belief nevertheless



and please no bashing in this thread because i want to discuss about this stuff without bashing i know this thread would attract bashing or head butting due to beliefs i want for once to have an simple discussion without any emotion at all thanks

 

[Star]

How about have you read a book is called" The Theory of Everything-The Origin and Fate of the Universe"?? Stehpen Hawking explain that.
The book say,
Hawking begins with a history of ideas about universe, from Aristotle's determination that the Earth is round to Hubble's discovery, over 2000 years, later, that the universe is expanding. Using that as a launching pad, he explores the reaches of modern physics, including theories on the origin of the universe -e.g., the big bang-, the nature of blackholes, and space -time.Finally , he poses the questions left unanswered by modern physics, especially how to combine all the partial theories into a "unified theory of everything". If we find the answer to that , "he claims," it would be the ultimate triumph of human reason."
Anyway I have read some of it. I would reread again to understand better.
Physics can be hard to understand.

 

[Dark-Half]

well not all things have to be logical there is documented supernatural events through out the world even if its illogical it still exist nevertheless so so my theory is the universe is infinite because we havent even begin to discover an portion of the universe granted we know other solar systems yet there is so much more out there and how far does it reach? doi have evidence that infinite unverse does exist? no i do not but its just an theory as for the unvierse creation i as an chirisitan believes that god created it it might sound illogical but its still an belief nevertheless



and please no bashing in this thread because i want to discuss about this stuff without bashing i know this thread would attract bashing or head butting due to beliefs i want for once to have an simple discussion without any emotion at all thanks

I have to say that if the universe is finite then the theory that God created the universe would be E X T R E M E L Y plausible -- Because it would be an ant farm, literally.

If the universe is inifinte -- which I hope it is, then possiblities are endless to other beings of intelligence. creatures, energy types. This is fearsome as well as awesome. "When mars attacks" Haha...

Star- I do know who the person is and know some references to his work but that's it.

 

[Theseus]

Sorry I did not get to post immediately after because of an arson-ignited wildfire near where I live in California. It was actually heading straight for my residence along with 30-60 mph gusts, and many semi-trucks on the highway were being knocked over by high winds. Not to mention that there was so much smoke around here that the sky had orange-reddish clouds blocking much of the sun for two days straight.

I was watching the news, staying updated regularly and communicating with some family members about it.

Dark-Half,
I have seen both movies you mentioned. The movie "The One" with Jet Li is about alternate realities and follows the concept of parallel universes. One of my favorite books is called A Wrinkle in Time by Madeline L'Engle. I read it as a child and that got me interested in physics because of the word 'tesseract', which is simply a folding of space-time to allow for quicker travel (think of a string and crossing it by putting the two ends together to get from points A to B instead of walking the entire length of the string.) This concept is treated lightly in the book, but it is a good introduction without going into the specifics. Tesseract

The reason I brought up Hawkwing's hypothesis in the first place was because it somewhat follows what you're thinking--"Does the universe expand outward or is it indeed confined and finite to the point you 'exit' the said area of confinement and appear at exactly the oppositive ends of the galaxy?" as you recently stated. It's like the Earth's boundaries, when you go around the world, you return to the point you started at and keep going without hitting any boundaries. See, that's why I brought up the "no boundary" proposal. It would be one "scientific" explanation for why God wouldn't necessarily be arbitrary in the universe's creation, according to Stephen Hawking.

Here's part of an interview between Stephen and an interviewer:
----------------------------------------
SUE: To oversimplify your theories hugely, and I hope you'll forgive me for this, Stephen, you once believed, as I understand it, that there was a point of creation, a big bang, but you no longer believe that to be the case. You believe that there was no beginning and there is no end, that the universe is self-contained. Does that mean that there was no act of creation and therefore that there's no place for God?

STEPHEN: Yes, you have oversimplified. I still believe the universe has a beginning in real time, at the big bang. But there's another kind of time, imaginary time, at right angles to real time, in which the universe has no beginning or end. This would mean that the way the universe began would be determined by the laws of physics. One wouldn't have to say that God chose to set the universe going in some arbitrary way that we couldn't understand. It says nothing about whether or not God exists - just that He isn't arbitrary.
----------------------------------------

I hypothesized an idea about the atom being alike to a miniature solar system, and looked it up and indeed some people have thought of it, even though there are significant differences between the atom and the solar system, but when I thought further and deeper, I looked up to see if anyone had come up with the next thing, and it seems that indeed they had. I could not believe how exactly similar what they'd said matched up with what I had thought of just by "thinking" about it... but then for a third time, I thought further and deeper, and what I've come up with threw me off my foot at first because it suggested that even with the "no boundary proposal", God could've still been arbitrary. In fact, I don't think even Hawking has heard of what I'm thinking, which is why he says "It says nothing about whether or not God exists - just that He isn't arbitrary." It seems to me that evolutionists and creationists are too concerned with proving themselves correct, that they do not see what's right in front of them: the possibility they both could be correct. I'm not talking about the age of the universe, I am talking about the origin of the universe itself, which suggests that even at t=0, the laws of physics were involved. Current theoretical physics in the big bang theory only goes as far back as Planck time, which is not t=0, but 1 planck time after big bang took effect and the laws of physics were no longer broken down.

I started this thread because I might be onto something.

Star,
I have read a few of Stephen Hawkwing's interviews and articles/lectures, but have not yet read any of his books including "A Brief History of Time." I will try to pick up a copy the next time I stop by the bookstore. This man is such a brilliant theorist that it would be a real shame if I didn't. I do agree that physics can be hard to understand, having taken classes in engineering physics myself. But let me make this clear for everyone: if there's something in physics you'd like to share which is somehow related to the origin of the universe, such as intra-wormholes or inter-wormholes in some way, please feel free to bring it up. I am certain there are some concepts in physics I have never heard of and would welcome your input as well. This discussion was created so we could learn from each other.

darkflare83,
Everything prior to planck time is speculation, including infinite universes. Check out my "sequence of thought" in post number 6 if you haven't and read it carefully. The first 3 in in the sequence are especially critical. It turns what seems otherwise illogical into observations that lead to a probable conclusion, i.e. the existence of God. For example, even with an infinite number of universes, what created the laws of physics? What's your answer? Is there something in physics that I've overlooked? Be sure and let me know if there is.

I want to back up what you've just said... to everyone- no bashing, please. Let's keep this down to a civil discussion. Thank you.

 

[Theseus]

Correction to my previous post: 'tesseract' is actually a hypercube, but it was treated very vaguely in the book A Wrinkle in Time. The concept of a tesseract was used by L'Engle with the illustration of an ant walking along the length of a string with endpoints A and B, and then the endpoints being put together to shorten the ant's walking distance between points A and B. However, Wikipedia indicates that her concept of the "ant and the string" more closely resembles a wormhole. I normally know when I'm unclear about something and will check up to make sure I'm correct before posting. This time I checked afterwards instead of beforehand.

 

[netrox]

Hi Theasus, here are my comments:

"1. If the universe had a beginning, was there something prior to the beginning? It would have to be something beyond human comprehension that defies logic, science, and imagination. Something that's probably always been there; no beginning and no end. This makes no scientific sense. The scientific, evolutionary belief that the universe had a beginning is self-contradictionary because in order to have a beginning, something had to have triggered it, so something must've already been there to trigger it, otherwise nothing would remain nothing. How would you dispute this?"

When we discuss about the universe, we are talking about THIS particular universe which has its beginning and will meet its end. We don't know what happened BEFORE the universe was born. Do we really need to know what happened before the birth of universe? More importantly, why does that matter to you?

"2. An infinite number of universes exists, but the same phenomenon remains: what triggered it and put matter and anti-matter into existence? It cannot be nothing, because the laws of physics had to have been created by something."

We only observe our own universe. We have no proof that other universes exist. The idea that we have universes within universes is called multiverses. It's a theory and we have no evidence to support it. The string theories are way too complicated and I fail to see what we will benefit from those theories right now. Yes, we have quantum mechanics and yes, it's a very bizarre concept but it borders dangerously on pseudo-science.

"3. The existence of another race of aliens, whether occupied with individual or collective entities, still fails to answer if they're finite beings, created somehow, or infinite without beginning or end, which makes as much sense as being created from nothing although "infinite" and "created from nothing" aren't synonymous because it's like an oxymoron: "an infinite being without beginning that was created"?? Not everything could have been created. There had to be a source."

Surely, there had to be a source but my educated guess would be that the source is dynamically eternal and that is definitely beyond our comprehension. That's only a guess. Anyone can say the source is God but you know, there are so many definitions of God.

"4. If God exists, whether a mere cosmic force (Spinoza's God) or one that has a conscience, then he's all that I can come up with to trigger the phenomenon of how the universe began based on the above."

If that's the only thing you can come up with it *right now*, that's fine with me. I don't see why you can't think that way.

"5. Our capability to think is created by neuron synapses in the brain. Our ability to "think" seems as logical as the presence of a God who can reason, because our ability to think is illogical in itself. If we are capable of it, why can't whatever has created us, whether it's the laws of physics or God himself? Therefore, logic in this instance tells me that God can think like we do. Can you tell me why it's not a logical conclusion?"

We are illogical, irrational, stupid, and human and that's the best evidence that Intelligent Designer does not exist. Computers never make mistakes, humans do. When computers err, that's because of humans.

"6. Since God's existence will probably never get scientifically backed up, and I have arrived at the conclusion of the existence of a "God of reason" according to my logic, I have no choice but to choose to believe in His existence."

To me, it's more of "Mind of Reason" than God of Reason. You are the one reasoning about your own existence. God doesn't give you the mind, you were given a mind by your own parents. You imagine that such an invisible force is responsible for your own existence. That's the way I see it.

"7. Ask yourself, do you believe that you have a soul? If so, prove you have a soul by backing it up with scientific evidence, by getting a sample of it. In the same way, try to prove God's existence if he's an unembodied spirit."

and...

"8. Do you care about your soul? Do you know the answer to what may happen to you after death? Is science capable of obtaining hard data from people in the afterlife?"

No, I don't. I don't believe in existence of souls. When I die, I am gone for good. No emotions, no memories, nothing. I think the problem is that we hold our lives and experiences to be so unique and sacred, it's so difficult to accept that we are born and die with no true purpose other than to live and breed. Also, it's an enormous grief to lose someone you love deeply and it is difficult to accept that your loss is gone forever. Wouldn't you find comfort knowing that your loss may be living somewhere else after death and that you'll see him/her after you die?

"9. Questions like those were intended to be answered by religion, not science."

Yes, that provides plenty of room for religion or philosophy!

"10. Does this sequence of logic seem rational or irrational to you?"

that's fine to me and it's often what many conclude.